A stunning new Ministry of Defense (MoD) report circulating in the Kremlin states that President Putin, this morning, issued an order to the 58th Army Headquarters of the North-Caucasian Military District to immediately deploy “selected” regiments and brigades of Federation military electronic warfare, anti-aircraft, multiple rocket launcher, anti-tank, motorized rifle, and artillery forces to the Turkish-Armenia border—which in total comprises nearly 7,000 Russian troops now being put into full combat status.

According to this report, the legal authorization for this massive combat deployment is due to the joint Russian-Armenian missile air defense system agreement ordered to be signed by President Putin on 11 November and which will be finalized this week by Prime Minister Medvedev.

With Armenia now becoming a vital part of the Russian Joint Air Defense, this report continues, Federation military forces will now be able to counter threats from Turkey coming from that nations western border—which will mirror the air defense protections provided by Federation Aerospace and Naval forces on Turkey’s border with Syria that since being implemented this past week have seen both United States and Turkish aircraft completely cease flying missions against Islamic State terrorists in this war zone all together.

Important to note too about this Federation military deployment to Armenia, this report says, are that these forces will be protected, like their counterparts operating in Syria, with S-400 Triumf (NATO designation: SA-21 Growler) medium/long-range mobile surface-to-air missile systems and Krasukha-4 jamming platforms giving them near total air defense superiority over 85 percent of Turkish territory.

The Krasukha-4 broadband multifunctional jamming station is mounted on a BAZ-6910-022 four-axle-chassis and like the Krasukha-2, the Krasukha-4 counters NATO-Turkish AWACS and other air borne radar systems. The Krasukha-4, also, has the range for effectively disrupting low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites and can cause permanent damage to targeted radio-electronic devices with ground based radars also being a viable target—which is, undoubtedly, MoD experts in this report state, the reason US and Turkish aircraft have fled from the skies over Syria.

With the criminal Erdogan regime in Turkey continuing to support Islamic State terrorists in Syria and Iraq, this report further notes, President Putin’s order today to begin the deployment of Federation military forces to Armenia will protect that nations peoples from their barbaric Turkish enemies who just a century ago (1915-1917) massacred an estimated 1.5 million men, women and children in what is known now as the Armenian Genocide.

And to the great shame of the United States against these Armenia peoples too, this report grimly states, President Obama, this past August, and for the 7th year in row, broke his promise to them to acknowledge the genocide committed against them by Turkey.

The Federation, however, this report continues, is not only one of the 25 nations that has acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, this past week a bill was introduced into the Russian parliament on holding to account anyone who denies that the killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turkish forces was “genocide”.

With Turkish President Erdogan having lashed out at Russia, Germany and France for recognizing the Armenian Genocide, this report warns, his actions against the Kurdish peoples in the Levant Region are even more troubling—especially since this past summer when he broke off all peace talks with them.

But to the Federations greatest fears of the criminal Erdogan necessitating the deployment of thousands of Russian troops to Turkey’s border, this report concludes, is his using of Islamic State terrorists to create for himself a new empire—and which he and his Prime Minister this past May (2015) made no secret of when they declared to the entire Islamic world:

The Electric Yerevan protest provides us with an excellent opportunity to review some of the basic underlying mechanics and psychology of the Color-Spring tactic. It is important to share these publicly, for it is indeed probable that the Color-Spring tactic will be increasingly applied in the world as a “hybrid soft-power/hard-power tactic”.

A moral principle held by Gene Sharp, who was one of the tactic’s main developers, was that violence is not necessary for revolution. What is strange, contradictory, even dishonest here is that violence is reduced taxonomically to the physical violence of the state’s gendarmes against the civilians. But we know that violence comes in many forms.

We live in a time of great violence; physical, psychological, legal, economic, spiritual violence. Not only has the Color Revolution tactic engendered the latter four, but its mutation into the Arab Spring tactic also employs heinous physical violence. We can see today, tens of thousands dead in Libya, hundreds of thousands in Syria, and a mounting figure in Ukraine which threatens to surpass the precedents.

“Non-violent” change in Syria

Novices to political science and political activism may be lured by the spectre and spectacle of the Color Revolution method that has characterized ostensible movements for radical social change in the last generation. The symbols have become iconic and clichéd: the tent city, the die-in, the girl placing flowers in the gendarme’s gun barrels, water cannons and tear-gas, the fist flag.

What is missing of course from this view is an understanding of the real social forces in a society, class and economic forces. For forty years, genuine activism, labor union militancy, has been marginalized. In place of direct action against the ruling class at the very places that make their wealth, is a strange simulation of late 1960’s student activism; shown to us on a never-ending film reel loop.

Others have caught on to the fact that the US has been funding these protest movements, and that these ‘grass-roots’ movements are in fact astroturf movements. Still, it is misunderstood how the US viewed these governments before they tried to destabilize them.

One thing which is often popularly misunderstood about the Color-Spring tactic, by those who know that the US is behind them, is that governments being targeted for regime change by the US are not just those which have apparently bad relations with the US, but may in fact be generally US-friendly governments. By and large, in fact, the latter is the case. We will be exploring this aspect as it relates to Armenia.

Also we will look at some of the methods used in the application of this tactic in Armenia, and at the general psychological and technical framework of the organizing methods.

Gene Sharp – a man of ‘Non-Violence’

Why the US Targets ‘Regimes’ for ‘Change’

In the Color-Spring tactic, the US may target countries for ‘regime change’ that it has had generally constructive relations with, but whose other ties are increasingly problematic. It may be also generally friendly countries who refuse to commit resources to reshaping regional power balances, such as with Mubarak in Egypt, who was reluctant to interfere with Syria. Another reason may be that the targeted country has a natural relationship with other countries in its region which, regardless of the official position of the government, promotes certain economic and meta-political relationships and developments which are contrary to US interests. In the latter case, it may be desirable to employ a scorched earth policy, known as the ‘failed state’, in order to destroy the material foundations of economic and political coherency.

Given the failure of the Orange Revolution to frustrate relations with Russia, the situation in Ukraine may be an example of this scorched earth/failed state strategy. Conclusively, the Color-Spring tactic is compatible with any number of strategies, and can be a part of producing any number of desired outcomes, and as such is a very useful weapon to possess.

[Victoria Nuland’s] role in the Ukrainian events forever marks her as an agent for US-supported regime change in the former Soviet sphere, and her visit anywhere in that space should be seen as the bad omen that it is.

By Andrew Korybko, March 1, 2015
Posted on Oriental Review

The US’ Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, Victoria Nuland, visited Baku on 16 February as part of her trip to the Caucasus, which also saw her paying stops in Georgia and Armenia. While Azerbaijan has had positive relations with the US since independence, they’ve lately been complicated by Washington’s ‘pro-democracy’ rhetoric and subversive actions in the country. Nuland’s visit, despite her warm words of friendship, must be looked at with maximum suspicion, since it’s not known what larger ulterior motives she represents on behalf of the US government.

A Bad Omen

Nuland is most infamously known for her “Fuck the EU!” comment that was uncovered during a secretly recorded conversation with the American Ambassador in Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt. The two were conspiring to build a new Ukrainian government even before democratically elected (but unpopular and corrupt) president Viktor Yanukovich was overthrown by the US-supported EuroMaidan coup. Nuland played a direct role in events, not only behind the scenes, but also on the streets, since she proudly handed out cookies and other foodstuffs to the ‘protesters’ that would violently seize power just over two months later. Her role in the Ukrainian events forever marks her as an agent for US-supported regime change in the former Soviet sphere, and her visit anywhere in that space should be seen as the bad omen that it is.

Like Husband, Like Wife

Normally an individual’s personal life doesn’t have any bearing on their professional one, but in the case of Nuland, it’s the opposite because her husband is the leading neo-conservative thinker Robert Kagan. He and his ilk are known for their expertise in exploiting foreign geography to maximize US power, regardless of the regional cost. Also, he previously referred to Azerbaijan in 2006 as a “dictatorship” and said the US will “pay the price” for dealing with it when responding to a user-submitted Q&A session with the Financial Times:

“During the Cold War, both Europeans and Americans had to compromise with dictators around the world in order to weaken the Soviet Union and communism. What would be, in your view Mr Kagan, the new sort of compromises that the US government is willing to make to defeat terrorism?
Corneliu, Bucharest

Robert Kagan: Clearly we are making such kinds of compromises all over the place in the war on terrorism, although I must say I doubt they are proving very useful.

We are turning a mostly blind eye to the Mubarak dictatorship in Egypt, despite much rhetoric to the contrary, as well in Saudi Arabia. We have been forgiving of the dictatorships in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. Nor have we been very critical of the Putin dictatorship in Russia, no matter how many people he assassinates.

This is all largely in the service of the war on terror. During the Cold War I actually believed that we wrong to support so many dictators, for it often did not help but hurt in the struggle against communism, in addition to being a violation of the principles we were struggling to defend.

I am equally unpersuaded today that our support for these dictatorships will help us fight terrorism, and once again we pay the price of moral and ideological inconsistency.”

Given the ideological context in which Nuland likely sees eye-to-eye on with her husband, plus her experience in instigating the Color Revolution in Ukraine, it is not likely that she came to Baku with positive intentions, or even with a positive image of the country in her mind. This is all the more so due to the recent scandal over Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

Foreign Agent, Domestic Punishment

The US-government-sponsored information agency was closed down at the end of December under accusations that it was operating as a foreign agent. While the US has harshly chided the Azeri government for this, at the end of the day, it remains the country’s sovereign decision and right to handle suspected foreign agents as it sees fit. Azerbaijan’s law is similar to Russia’s, in that entities receiving foreign funds must register as foreign agents, and interestingly enough, both of these laws parallel the US’ own 1938 Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Continue reading →